THE new head of local government umberella body Cosla has fired a warning shot across the bows of Ministers looking to centralise services.
David O'Neill claims his colleagues will accept reform in the name of efficiency, but not on the say-so of mere "assertion" from Ministers demanding change.
He wants proof of evidence of the benefits of change. "Nobody is defending either the status quo or 'their own patch' simply for the sake of it."
"Cosla's attitude is that local government is and should be prepared to change when it can be demonstrated the changes proposed will actually solve the problem for the long term and deliver better more sustainable services," he added.
He said: "An understandable frustration might be that collecting the evidence, examining alternative models of both local accountability and service delivery is simply taking too much time and I would agree with those who are pressing very strongly for that work to be speeded up so that we can commit ourselves to thought through solutions.
"However, the danger is that in our frustration to speed things up, we simply jump to conclusions that have no basis in evidence, no real likelihood of success and are predicated on prejudice and short-termism rather than longer term sustainability."
He argues: "There must be a debate that thoroughly examines the commonly held view that it is always cheaper and more effective to create a single massive centralised structure for the delivery of local public services rather than a more heavily decentralised and locally-driven model.
"I do not understand why this view is so strongly held without there being much evidence to support it."
Mr O'Neill said that the new Police and Fire and Rescue Services will cost less not because of the fact they will need less resources but because Central Government will cut their budgets.
"If the same reduced allocation had been awarded to the previous eight-force model, I am sure a similar reduction in overall cost would have been delivered."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article